PDA

View Full Version : Failure to check boots



Brian Ravenhill
09-01-07, 10:01
Ever had the problem of trying to check studs and brief the players when they wont get together to do it all at the same time.

Scenario

Ref ‘Hello blue captain, I’d like to check boots at 2.00pm is that OK’
Blue Captain ‘That’s fine ref see you at 2’
2.00pm
Ref ‘Are we all here captain to check boots’
Blue Captain ‘No ref, some are still getting a rub’
Ref ‘But we had agreed 2.00pm, I want them all here at 2.10pm I’m only going through this once.
2.10pm
Ref ‘Are we all here captain to check boots’
Blue Captain ‘No ref, one is still getting his rub’
Ref ‘Ok I’ll check those here’
Referee checks all studs and briefs players.
Ref ‘Blue captain whose missing’
Blue Captain ‘It’s our 6 sir.
2.15pm
Blue 6 ‘Do you want to check my studs ref?’
Ref ‘Not now thanks I’m in the middle of my warm up’
2.30 Kick off
Ref ‘Blue 6, Blue captain, here please’
Ref ‘ Sorry 6 but you’ll have to leave the field as I haven’t checked your boots, I might have time in 5 minutes. Skipper do you want somebody else to start or play with 14 until I’ve checked his studs?

What would happen if the referee was to try this, could he do this?

Dixie
09-01-07, 11:01
Bit above my pay grade, Brian. I have no chance of getting everyone together in a changing room, and do studs, chat etc on the pitch about 15 minutes before KO. Main problem I have is on this front is the guy having a smoke and finishing his pre-match beer with his mates by the bar, and also the fact that all studs feel sharpish when covered in sandy soil

beckett50
09-01-07, 22:01
You'd need balls the size of Jupiter to get away with it.:eek:

I do find it enormously frustrating at L7 and above when you make an agreement on time to do the stud check & FR with the skipper (and/or the coach) and the scenario as described happens.

Would love to try it, just to see the reaction of the coaching staff;)

SimonSmith
09-01-07, 23:01
"We're going to set a time for a stud check, captain, that works for you. I don't want to get the way of your routine, so let's agree a time now. But please understand - anyone NOT at the check won't be starting, understand?"

How's that work for y'all?

speedy
10-01-07, 10:01
Brian,

Well above my pay greade to but I insist that the players are checked together prior to my brief in the changing room prior to the start of the game. If the team captain cant organise that then I dont take to the field and they wait... normally at this time of year they come to me asking to start a few minutes early my answer is yes if you get this done and that...putting the emphasis on them to organise their life and make my job easier.

madref
10-01-07, 10:01
Hi

At my grade I use the same ploy as Simon, look captain, I need to check studs, have a quick chat with you and do a front row saftey brief.

What time would you like this done if anybody does not turn up they don't start.

Does the trick at any level.

David

Wert Twacky
10-01-07, 14:01
If a ref said to player who politely came over during his (the ref's) warm-up for a boot check and the ref said "not now I'm in the middle of my warm-up", I suspect the ref in question would somehow find himself being run at during the game for being up his arse.

I aways air on the side of "I'll fit in around you (the teams)" for stud check, etc. And anyway, in over 8 years I've yet to come across an illegal boot.

Are you gonna honeslty remember someone coming on the pitch whose boots you didn't see?

Don't fret the petty stuff.

madref
10-01-07, 15:01
Hi

If one player came over and asked me to check studs in my warm up, I would say sorry I would like you all together need to speak to you as well.

If the captain came over and asked can you so all the team Sir, then I would do it.

Petty stuff, now this I disagree with at the stud check, you can chat smile and put your marker down before the game has started. I think the stud check at any level is very important.

David

SimonSmith
10-01-07, 20:01
It's not the small stuff, it's important for a whole host pf reasons. And yes, I HAVE come across footwear that was not going out on the pitch.

I think it's important to do it at a time that is convenient for the team - which is what the post says. But once we've agreed that time, they must all be there.

craign
10-01-07, 23:01
If I can get a whole team in the changing room then that's the best situation.

If only one or two are missing, I'll do who is there and catch stragglers as I go.

If more are missing, I'll do them when the team gets together in bulk for the first time, usually on the pitch for warm-up, etc. I often split them into forwards & backs and do them at separate times if it will minimise the disruption to their pre-match plans and make them more receptive to what I'm saying.

If I can't get them in the changing rooms, the coach & captain are made clearly aware that if I don't get studs done AT THE LATEST 30 mins before kick-off then I will disrupt their pre-match stuff if needed to ensure that I get it done. Earlier than 30 mins pre-kick-off, I'll happily defer to fitting into a team's plans and will work around them.

Wert Twacky
11-01-07, 13:01
Madref, Simon Smith

Sorry, perhaps I didn't make myself clear - I'm def not saying that the stud check is not important, it is - I agree, but all I'm eluding to is that I'm not going to turn away a player who missed a boot check, should he come over to me when I'm warming up.
Would you turn way a coach/assessor/physio who came up to you to ask a question mid warm up?

All I am saying is that if I've done a kit check at a pre-arranged time, whereever suited, and someone happens to have missed it - I'm not gonna bust a hernia and fret over it, or even turn a player away from the game because of it.

SimonSmith
11-01-07, 14:01
Honestly? I don't know.
Probably because my warm up is a quick walk around the pitch to look at the markings.

It's a two way street - I like to have the courtesy to absolutley avoid interfering with the players in their warm up, and I make it clear when I am available in case of questions. Given that, is it that unreasonable to ask to be left alone when I warm up? I know some guys who make their pre match routines look like planning a major logistical exercise!

madref
11-01-07, 14:01
Hi

I tend to warm up as far away from , players spectators as I can usually on a different field. Coaches / Assessors up north will not venture that far south to have a word with me.

On a serious note through, if you do not check that players clothing and he is wearing blades and splits somebodies leg, back or head open I think you will have solicitors round you like vultures in a desert!

When I start the stud check I always ask everybody here Captain, if he says yes then I have be back covered

David


David

Davet
11-01-07, 14:01
I often find the best time to do stud check is when the teams have begun warm up and are doing their stretching - many sides do this ina big circle, I just walk around the circle as they go the stretches - I always ask if its Ok and most sides seem to be perfectly happy with that. In the changing rooms things are often a bit chaotic - once they are out then the space is better, and they all have their boot on - prevents me checking the set they pull out of their bag - rather than the one they actually wear.

Emmet Murphy
11-01-07, 22:01
On a serious note through, if you do not check that players clothing and he is wearing blades and splits somebodies leg, back or head open I think you will have solicitors round you like vultures in a desert!


I was told when I was doing my National Foundation that blades were now allowed - is that not the case?

Deeps
12-01-07, 01:01
I was told when I was doing my National Foundation that blades were now allowed - is that not the case?

Despite one's personal feelings concerning 'blades', the referee is only interested in whether footware is sharp or not. Any footware is allowed from hob nailed boots to carpet slippers, providing it is not dangerous to other players.

Robert Burns
12-01-07, 02:01
I'm with the laid back approach.

I like to try and start the game with a good feeling anf getting on with both captains, wether it finishes like that is different thread.

If a player came over and asked if I can check his studs, no probs, only takes 2 seconds, so no hassle.

jboulet4648
12-01-07, 02:01
About 30-40 minutes before each match, I go over to each team, ask to speak to the captain, ask the captain his name, and tell him that I will need to check his sides boots and speak to his FR, so when he is ready for me, I will be over yonder warming up, for him to get my attention.

I put it in the captains hands to decide when he wants to have his sides mental preparedness "disrupted" by me. Its also how I start my rapport building with each captain. I then go over and start my warmup.

But I am with RB and all when it comes to boots, if it does not look dangerous, I am okay with it.

Mike Whittaker
12-01-07, 04:01
Despite one's personal feelings concerning 'blades', the referee is only interested in whether footware is sharp or not. Any footware is allowed from hob nailed boots to carpet slippers, providing it is not dangerous to other players.

Have never been happy with this responsibility...
What experience do any of us have with regard to the damage caused to the skin of a player when a particular type of blade is drawn across it?
We may have seen the effect of a nylon soccer stud... but a hard plastic blade?
Does the fact that I have never seen anyone hurt by one of these automatically make it ok?

The failure of the powers that be to make aluminium studs the only thing acceptable is most disappointing.

jboulet4648
12-01-07, 05:01
A good number of US Players wear hard plastic blades and in my experience and from what has been relayed to me, there has never been a problem with safety.

didds
12-01-07, 08:01
A good number of US Players wear hard plastic blades and in my experience and from what has been relayed to me, there has never been a problem with safety.

FTR and FYI, and FWIW, AIUI manchester United has banned its players from wearing blades.

didds

Mike Whittaker
12-01-07, 09:01
FTR and FYI, and FWIW, AIUI manchester United has banned its players from wearing blades.

didds

Excuse my ignorance Didds, please expand abbreviations... Thanks

Padster
12-01-07, 09:01
For The Record, For Your Info, For What Its Worth, As I Understand It

IYSWIM (if you see what I mean)

Mike Whittaker
12-01-07, 09:01
For The Record, For Your Info, For What Its Worth, As I Understand It

IYSWIM (if you see what I mean)

Thank you...

Emmet Murphy
12-01-07, 11:01
Despite one's personal feelings concerning 'blades', the referee is only interested in whether footware is sharp or not. Any footware is allowed from hob nailed boots to carpet slippers, providing it is not dangerous to other players.

Right ... That makes sense.

Emmet Murphy
12-01-07, 11:01
FTR and FYI, and FWIW, AIUI manchester United has banned its players from wearing blades.

didds

That's true - for at least the last five years the younger players have been told not to wear them and the senior players "advised" not to! It's to do with how rigid they are when you plant your foot - the lack of movement causes stress on the knees and the lack of rotation can cause additional knee injuries. It's very similar at a number of other football clubs - Arsenal Watford Charlton to name a few.

jboulet4648
12-01-07, 14:01
I admit I was kind of oblivious to "the danger of blades"

Just googled it and found a couple of interesting articles.....but there is not an overwhelming amount of evidence against it from what I saw. I would be interested in looking at some articles written by sports physiologist or that sort concenring the biomechanics of knee injuries from blades.....as well as the number of lacerations caused by blades versus studs.

I have a pair of Kelme plastic blades and I love them for the traction I get in longer grass, as well as not killing my feet on harder ground.

Sinkers
13-01-07, 00:01
I understood that the metal tipped blade was illegal.
in my opinion the whole boot inspection is just a paradigm the blokes can show you boots and wear a different set.
Nylon blades or moulded studs can can severely erode and become dangerous.
legal boots are then used to walk across roads tracks and pathways were chips and changes can occur.
Difficult...

Deeps
13-01-07, 20:01
I inspected a set of studs today which, although not sharp, individually measured approximately 5 mm across. The player admitted to them being attached to soccer boots so I decided they were not fit for purpose and disallowed their use.

In the absence of IRB labels on boots, how does a referee know whether the clothing has been manufactured for rugby purposes or not?

Mike Whittaker
13-01-07, 20:01
I inspected a set of studs today which, although not sharp, individually measured approximately 5 mm across. The player admitted to them being attached to soccer boots so I decided they were not fit for purpose and disallowed their use.

In the absence of IRB labels on boots, how does a referee know whether the clothing has been manufactured for rugby purposes or not?

What the were manufactured for is, surely, irrelevant? Fit for purpose? Thought the only criterion was safety? Were they unsafe?

Personally I do not think a referee should have to make this judgement in this way. It is like starting a game on a muddy pitch. The team says whether the pitch is fit and the ref can stop it if the evidence of the play leads him to the conclusion that it is unsafe? But before the game he does not say that the pitch looks unsafe and cannot be used. It should be the same for studs.

In other words the law makers should specify what is or is not acceptable in measurable terms rather than with judgement calls on equipment.

And regulation 12 is just a load of mumbo jumbo that has no relevance for a ref before a game unless, for example, he wants to make all the players go for a 400m run on concrete to test the abrasion properties...

Of course if you regard a blade as being moulded and the actual blades as being ridges then you can of course just ban them all???

Sorry, but getting a bit annoyed with this stupid ruling on a matter of safety...:mad:

Deeps
13-01-07, 23:01
What the were manufactured for is, surely, irrelevant? Fit for purpose? Thought the only criterion was safety? Were they unsafe?

The iRB has placed the onus on manufacturers, retailers, clubs and individual players to comply with Law 4 and Regulation 12 in regard to boots and studs yet the referee is unable to establish whether players' boots and studs have been manufactured/supplied for use in the game of rugby as there are no markings on studs or footwear to indicate this. (I suspect the iRB does not want to risk losing all those little Johnnys whose parents can only afford cheap soccer boots.)

With his knowledge of Law and a little research the referee can determine the acceptable physical characteristics of studs from Regulation 12 Appendix 2. Yet guidance, as I have suggested elsewhere, is to check only that footwear/studs are not sharp in which case I should have allowed the player to wear the boots/studs for the game this afternoon.

I believed these studs were potentially dangerous in that the weight distribution per stud would place other players at risk should these boots come into body contact. I had no problem coming to this conclusion and believe this is a fair use of one's discretion.

Thus automatic approval of all presented footwear (provided it is not sharp) is no longer valid. As long as the referee is required to conduct an inspection of kit prior to a game (to what standard is he inspecting? Law 4, Reg 12?) then he will retain complete discretion as to what players are permitted to wear.

Mike Whittaker
14-01-07, 01:01
Given safety as a prime requirement one might suggest that every referee in training should be made to understand and demonstrate a competence in the application of Law 4 and Reg 12 before he takes the field. This would be as ludicrous as the expectation that referees can do any more than guess what will or will not prove to be safe in play.

Deeps
14-01-07, 02:01
Given safety as a prime requirement one might suggest that every referee in training should be made to understand and demonstrate a competence in the application of Law 4 and Reg 12 before he takes the field.

A referee in training should be made to understand the requirements of Law 4 and Reg 12 particularly as these requirements govern what the iRB deem to be safe for players to wear.


This would be as ludicrous as the expectation that referees can do any more than guess what will or will not prove to be safe in play.

No, that has quite rightly been taken away from the referee by the standard set in Law. It's up to the referee to ensure players comply which is why he inspects studs prior to the game. The problem is the lack of clarity as to what does and what does not meet the standard. Let's lobby for the famous iRB label on studs or undersoles before a court has to pronounce on the issue or this lack of clarity.

Mike Whittaker
14-01-07, 11:01
...agree with your conclusion Deeps. Meanwhile off to see the U14s are studded ok!!

Deeps
14-01-07, 11:01
...agree with your conclusion Deeps. Meanwhile off to see the U14s are studded ok!!

Enjoy.

Safely returned from the far end of the line in the Michael Green part of the Isla de Wigit late last evening, am off this morning to watch Deeps junior manage US Portsmouth v Jersey U15s in a league match; I'll ensure he is up to speed on studs. Thence in my Manager's hat to administer Hav Colts v G+F, in an eagerly contested affair no doubt, watched over by one of our newly promoted Level 5s thank goodness.

Davet
14-01-07, 23:01
Deeps - I understand your concerns; but the ref is responsible only for immediate, and frankly obvious, safety issues such as sharp edges. I have read the regulations - they are complex and not checkable without laboratory facilities.

It is the responsibility of the clubs and of the individual players to ensure that the boots they wear comply with regulation 12. If the boots do not so comply then it will NOT be the ref who appears in court - but the player and the club. That is the whole point. If you take on the further responsibility of checking for compliance with regulation 12 then you are undermining the whole legal framework which puts the onus on the player and takes it away from the referee.

So long as the ref checks for sharp or clearly dangerous studs before the game then the ref is covered.

Deeps
15-01-07, 02:01
Deeps - I understand your concerns; but the ref is responsible only for immediate, and frankly obvious, safety issues such as sharp edges. I have read the regulations - they are complex and not checkable without laboratory facilities.....So long as the ref checks for sharp or clearly dangerous studs before the game then the ref is covered.

Dave, I don't think it is quite as simple as that. My laboratory calibrated Mk 1 eyeball can tell the difference between a 5 mm diameter pin stud and a 10 mm normal stud which, frankly, was obvious. Thus I have identified the set of 5 mm studs as failing to meet the designated safety standard and, in common with other safety issues, having identified the safety shortfall, I own it until it is resolved.

One's responsibilities cannot be dismissed as easily as sharp edges only, if you identify a problem you must resolve it or you are negligent. 'Law 4 is quite specific, why did you restrict yourself to sharp edges and not apply it to the full?'...'Well M'lud.'

OB..
15-01-07, 03:01
Law 4.3 (a) Studs of players’ boots must conform with the IRB specifications (Regulation 12).

This does not actually say the referee is responsible for checking. Since the official advice is that he is not so responsible, I doubt if a court would pursue that line.

Anyway, the point is probably moot. It would be hard to argue that a particular size of stud was the reason for an injury unless it was such as to be easily recognised as dangerous.

Mike Whittaker
15-01-07, 09:01
The problem we now have is one of the inevitably hopeless inconsistency between referees as to what is or is not 'safe' and allowable.

We all have our own views and who is to say who is right given this framework in which to work.

Personally I think that the hard back corner of a blade ("sharp edge or ridge") is dangerous and do not now allow them on the pitch although regular call is that ref last week says they are fine. Until such time as assurance provided that they are deemed 'safe' officially, this will remain my view.

It is also about time that the risk to the wearers of these blades was publicised more, but then this would upset manufacturers and sponsors no doubt?

Dixie
15-01-07, 11:01
For the first and second times this weekend, I had to tell players that their studs were dangerous, and would not be allowed on the pitch. The first was on Saturday, when the visiting lock had ali stids ground so far down that the edges were sharp and a hole was visible in the centre, so the stud was like an inverted volcano. The second was on Sunday, when a visiting colts player had worn his metal-tipped blades away, and all that was left at the ball of the foot was a sharp plastic base.

The lock trudged to the home team's shop, and was able to play after replacing the offending studs. The colt was last seen trudging to the changing rooms, having ascertained that no-one else had a spare pair of boots, and there was no way of buying replacements for his specialist product at the home ground.

Two questions: a) why do players continue to wear blades, when a stud issue can require replacement of the entire shoe? and b) - how could I, as a ref working alone and without technical areas, ensure that the affected colt did not return to the playing enclosure and get onto the pitch as a substitute, still wearing the dodgy boots? I'm sure I'll be accused of being a something-ist, but after a fleeting meeting with 40 young men inside 5 minutes, I find they all look the same. I certainly couldn't have confirmed that the winger who appeared in the second half was not the lad trudging despondently back to the changing rooms - though I can absolutely guarantee that his No. 17 jersey did not appear on the pitch at all.

Dixie
15-01-07, 11:01
a ref working alone and without technical areas.

Despite apparent requirements in RFU regulations for technical areas on all pitches, I have never yet refereed where one has been marked out - even on 1st XV pitches at RFU Seal of Approval clubs. While I believe I have the power to designate an area as a technical area, and require coaches and subs to respect it, I don't - largely because I don't want to be in the position of trying to enforce it when the coaches or subs start patrolling the touchline. I have trouble enough trying to get the pressganged TJ somewhere close to where the ball went out.

Do others share this experience? If so, do you make an issue of it?

ex-lucy
15-01-07, 11:01
dixie. I agree with you. I have made my club aware of the RFU requirements. They refuse due to resources to make markings/ put ropes out and bring them in etc. Other clubs: I only know of 1 or 2 who are ok with these reqs, others just dont bother.
And as a referee, i dont want to appear too officious. And as you say, once you set up a technical area you then have to enforce the restrictions for coaches etc... too much hassle.
RFU: what are you going to do about it?

FlipFlop
15-01-07, 17:01
how could I ..... ensure that the affected colt did not return to the playing enclosure and get onto the pitch as a substitute, still wearing the dodgy boots? I certainly couldn't have confirmed that the winger who appeared in the second half was not the lad trudging despondently back to the changing rooms - though I can absolutely guarantee that his No. 17 jersey did not appear on the pitch at all.

Simple. Firstly when you say the boots are unacceptable take a good long look at the player. I find that taking them to one side and explaining why you don't like his boots/studs, means you get to interact with them, and therefore recognise them more. Secondly, if in any doubt, when the sub is made, ask to check their studs again. They might find it odd, but at least you have certainty, and if they are the bad boots you can either be kind and refuse the substitution, or follow the letter of the law and show the red card.

I've had this situation in a senior game where fly half went to change boots after I said no to the ones he was wearing. I went back to check them just before KO, and he hadn't, so I made it plain that if he was on the pitch at KO with them, he was being red carded. He didn't play in the end. Funnily enough, the next week I had the same team (who were now the away team), with the same player, and the same boots, and he didn't play that week either!

Rich Wartner
15-01-07, 21:01
USARFU
Laws Committee
Clarification on Allowable Cleat Patterns
It has recently become apparent there is some confusion in the US on the application of Law 4.4 (i):
A player must not wear a single stud at the toe of the boot.
I have heard reports of referees requiring that players cut a toe stud off molded rubber soles. This is not a requirement in Law. In fact, I have seen the results of this and they can be actually dangerous after a sloppy trim job, with sharp edges created when cutting off the stud.
The prohibition on single studs is meant for boots with replaceable studs. Soccer style cleats with molded bottoms are covered in Law 4.3 (b), as are many boots intended for other sports such as football:
Molded rubber multi-studded soles are acceptable provide they have no sharp edges or ridges.
In a similar vein, the boot style known as “blades” were accepted provisionally in 2001. That has not changed.
That said, the referee on the day always has the right and the obligation to decide that a particular shoe is unacceptable. Many shoes that are just fine when new can, after use and wear, become dangerous. That is why there is an equipment inspection before every game.
Peter Watson
Chair, USARFU Laws Committee

didds
16-01-07, 09:01
(I suspect the iRB does not want to risk losing all those little Johnnys whose parents can only afford cheap soccer boots.)


Not necessarily a bad approach - cost should not become a barrier to play.

When I were a nipper you used to be able to buy plastic moulded soled boots from woolies and Freeman hardy Willis for thruppence happeny which "did" for a cornucopia of sport uses - football, rugby, hockey, cross country, jumping on the thick kid, swimming, throwing at your sister, whatever. You can't get them any longer!!! But these would be perfect for just about everybody except - maybe - scrummagers up to at least u12... and nothing to get "dangerous" (save bizarre plastic burs I guess...)

didds

Mike Whittaker
16-01-07, 17:01
Not necessarily a bad approach - cost should not become a barrier to play.

When I were a nipper you used to be able to buy plastic moulded soled boots from woolies and Freeman hardy Willis for thruppence happeny which "did" for a cornucopia of sport uses - football, rugby, hockey, cross country, jumping on the thick kid, swimming, throwing at your sister, whatever. You can't get them any longer!!! But these would be perfect for just about everybody except - maybe - scrummagers up to at least u12... and nothing to get "dangerous" (save bizarre plastic burs I guess...)

didds

Woolies carried on selling them for years ... I know I used them for refereeing buying a new pair each year... must have a look and see if they still do!